Thursday, April 25, 2024
HomeCulture WarAt last, an honest debate on race

At last, an honest debate on race


THOSE plotting the West’s collapse hold a trump card: the Great Replacement. To give the Devil his due, they play it well. Porous borders, hate-speech laws and the cynical manipulation of Anglosphere kindness create a hostile environment for the diversity heretic.  

In this climate, it pays to reabsorb the arguments which make the dissident’s case unanswerable, hence driven from the public square. Enter a new book, Never Say D.I.E.: Three Dialogues on Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity, by George Carroway, published by Imperium Press.

The strength of this deceptively slim volume lies in its form as well as content. The author eschews conventional narrative for flowing conversation between twentysomething American campers. Arthur Croft represents the author, Charlie Lodge and Hans Deichert his ‘normie’ buddies.

While the characters aren’t fleshed out, the human dimension lends accessibility: we eavesdrop on civilised disagreement among truth-seekers. The campfire bonhomie is maintained despite the contentious topic of discussion. Arthur, the model ‘race realist’, gently teases out the errors of his mates rather than lecturing them (or us).

What whopping errors they are. ‘Diversity is our strength’, claim the liberal duo. Placed under Arthur’s close scrutiny, this disarming yet most damaging of woke mantras boils down to ‘Diversity is our diversity’. Some of us have noticed that we’re not stronger, physically, intellectually, or in any other way. On the contrary, we’re weaker because more fragmented.

But ‘God made a world that is full of diversity,’ counters Charlie. ‘Wouldn’t it be better to look at things as God looks at them?’ Like his friends, Arthur is a Christian; he can’t simply dismiss Christian universalism. But this doesn’t mean we should promote diversity. ‘If we race mix until we’re all the same shade of brown, the very diversity that God values will have been lost.’ One day, perhaps, advertisers obsessed with mixed-race couples will get the memo.

Arthur’s table-turning tactic recurs with profit, cementing the notion that leftists are the real racists. It’s Arthur who wants to preserve the integrity of other cultures. But this can happen only when the people of those cultures live in their own homelands, and we in ours. He might have added that the word ‘diversity’ implies divergence from a white median, ‘inclusion’ that whites do the including.

A skewed sense of obligation clouds the thinking of Arthur’s pals, who assert that rich nations must share their resources with those worse off. Strange, then, that they’re not outraged that the likes of China, South Korea and Japan don’t invite the world’s huddled masses to live among them. The best explanation is a fixation on the Other. ‘It’s more like a fetish than an opinion,’ observes Arthur.

Loyalty begins at home, as evidenced by the family unit (another reason why that institution is under assault). Besides, we don’t know how to help the Third World because its inhabitants are different from us. Not inferior, just different.

We now look upon colonialism as a harmful thing, but at its best it was an attempt to elevate the colonised, notably in Africa. Unfortunately, as Arthur notes, African countries haven’t exactly thrived since gaining independence, yet to infer a common denominator is beyond verboten.

What about the well-worn economic argument that immigrants do the menial jobs others won’t do? It’s often presented as though this was always the case. But native workers did these jobs routinely until big employers found a useful source of cheap labour: foreign labour.

Unchecked immigration suppresses wages and undermines the good working conditions fought for over the last century. But if enough people are persuaded that migrants are filling positions nobody else wants, they will feel good about treating them as slaves.  

Reason and argument won’t be enough to defeat the Great Replacers. They don’t want to hear it. For them, it’s about currying favour with new client groups, and the power this secures. But that doesn’t preclude us from engaging discerningly with more receptive audiences: family, friends, work colleagues.

This book will assist in that endeavour. We urgently need what Arthur, Charlie and Hans have, but what polite society has proscribed for decades: an honest debate on race.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Thank you.
If you have not already signed up to a daily email alert of new articles please do so. It is here and free! Thank you.

Stuart Major
Stuart Major
Stuart Major is an independent scholar based in Sussex.

Sign up for TCW Daily

Each morning we send The ConWom Daily with links to our latest news. This is a free service and we will never share your details.